Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
leider ist mein Büro im Zeitraum vom 04.10. bis zum 10.10. nicht besetzt. Ihre
Nachricht wird nicht weitergeleitet.
Sie erreichen mich in dringenden Fällen unter der Mobilfunknummer: 0170-98 91
243
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Florian Michel
--
Heliomedia
Dipl.-Infor
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 14:05:52 -0400
Brchk05 wrote:
> It's a 32-bit kernel and probably does not have PAE support enabled
> so I think the mystery has been solved. Thanks to everyone for your
> help.
Try linux-image-2.6-686-bigmem, it probably has PAE enabled.
Best regards,
-_Edwin
--
To UNSU
It's a 32-bit kernel and probably does not have PAE support enabled so I think
the mystery has been solved. Thanks to everyone for your help.
-Original Message-
From: Kees Cook
To: Brchk05
Cc: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Sent: Sun, Oct 10, 2010 1:40 pm
Subject: Re: non-executa
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 01:35:10PM -0400, Brchk05 wrote:
> nx is in /proc/cpuinfo as a flag, though it does not appear at all in my
> dmesg output. From what I can tell from the Ubuntu link you supplied, I am
> assuming this means that my CPU supports nx but I do not have the right type
>
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:35:10 -0400
Brchk05 wrote:
> Thanks, Kees.
>
>
> nx is in /proc/cpuinfo as a flag, though it does not appear at all in
> my dmesg output. From what I can tell from the Ubuntu link you
> supplied, I am assuming this means that my CPU supports nx but I do
> not have the ri
In this case, the target of my clobbered return address is on the stack (in the
stack local character buffer), so this is exactly what NX/XD is intended to
prevent.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Loftis
To: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Sent: Sun, Oct 10, 2010 1:08 pm
Subject:
Hi Wade,
Thanks for your response. Shellcode is native machine code. It is not shell
script code. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellcode
-Original Message-
From: Wade Richards
To: Brchk05
Cc: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Sent: Sun, Oct 10, 2010 11:59 am
Subject: Re: non
Thanks, Kees.
nx is in /proc/cpuinfo as a flag, though it does not appear at all in my dmesg
output. From what I can tell from the Ubuntu link you supplied, I am assuming
this means that my CPU supports nx but I do not have the right type of kernel,
i.e., one that uses PAE addressing, to supp
Hi,
* Wade Richards [2010-10-10 19:08]:
> The noexecstack option has no affect on shell code or any other interpreted
> language. It only prevents native code (aka machine code) from executing.
errm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellcode
--
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - n...@jabber.ccc.d
--On Sunday, October 10, 2010 9:53 AM -0400 Brchk05 wrote:
I am running Debian 2.6.26-21lenny4 and I am puzzled by an issue with the
enforcement of page permissions. I have written a simple program with a
basic buffer overflow and compiled two versions using gcc: one with -z
execstack and
The noexecstack option has no affect on shell code or any other interpreted
language. It only prevents native code (aka machine code) from executing.
--- Wade
On 2010-10-10, at 6:53, Brchk05 wrote:
>
> I am running Debian 2.6.26-21lenny4 and I am puzzled by an issue with the
> enforce
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:53:40AM -0400, Brchk05 wrote:
> However, I am able to inject and execute shellcode from a stack local
> character buffer in both versions. Is there another system option I am
> unaware of that affects enforcement? Is enforcement not supported for my
> system ver
I am running Debian 2.6.26-21lenny4 and I am puzzled by an issue with the
enforcement of page permissions. I have written a simple program with a basic
buffer overflow and compiled two versions using gcc: one with -z execstack and
another with -z noexecstack.
So, to verify that the optio
13 matches
Mail list logo
